Clinical efficacy of antiviral agents against coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

The prevalence of long COVID-19 syndrome in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia

Introduction

Long COVID affects millions of individuals worldwide with a wide range of persistent symptoms. Pathogenesis, prevalence and clinical approach of this syndrome remain not well characterized.The aim of the study is the estimation of prevalence of long-COVID and identification of possible risk factors.

Patients and Methods

This is an observational prospective study including COVID-19 patients hospitalized at the Department of Infectious Diseases of the University General Hospital of Alexandroupolis (Greece). Eligible COVID-19 patients were interviewed and examined 6, 12 and 18 months after COVID-19 symptoms onset and hospital discharge in order to evaluate the prevalence and consequences of long-COVID symptoms.

Results

A total number of 995 patients were included. The median age at discharge was 55 years and 53% of patients were retired. The majority was males (57%). Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 was completed in 52% (n=517) COVID-19 patients. More than 40% of COVID-19 patients had at least one symptom at 18 months after hospitalization. Intravenous antiviral 0treatment with remdesivir and complete vaccination status were found to lead to lower rates of Long-COVID.

Conclusions

More studies in larger patient cohorts are needed in order to identify the underlying biological mechanisms of long-COVID and create effective interventions for prevention and treatment.

Effectiveness of recently-approved oral antiviral medications on the outcome of patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and pre-existing chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the effectiveness of the oral antiviral agents nirmatrelvir - ritonavir (NMV-r) and molnupiravir (MOV) for treating mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with COPD.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study extracted data from the TriNetX platform and examined 94,984 COVID-19 patients with preexisting COPD from 1 January 2022, to 1 October 2023. Patients receiving NMV-r or MOV (study group) were compared with those not receiving oral antiviral agents (control group) after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

After PSM, 7,944 patients were classified into the study and control groups. The primary composite outcome of all-cause hospitalization, or death in 30 days was reported in 458 (5.7%) patients in the study group and 566 (7.1%) patients in the control cohort, yielding a hazard ratio [HR] of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.89; Table 2). Compared with the control group, the study group had a significantly lower risk of all-cause hospitalization (HR, 0.87; 95% CI: 0.76-0.99) and death (HR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.13-0.35).

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that oral antivirals - NMV-r or MOV might improve clinical outcomes in patients with preexisting COPD and COVID-19. However, only a small proportion of preexisting COPD patients with COVID-19 received oral antiviral treatment.

Clinical effectiveness of oral antiviral agents for treating non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients with chronic kidney disease

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir (NMV-r) and molnupiravir (MOV) in treating COVID-19 among chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study, using the TriNetX research network, identified stage 3-5 CKD and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients with non-hospitalized COVID-19 between 1 January 2022, and 31 May 2023. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare patients on NMV-r or MOV (antiviral group) against those not receiving these treatments (control group). The primary composite outcome was the cumulative hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause hospitalization or death within the 30-day follow-up.

RESULTS

After PSM, two balanced cohorts of 6,275 patients each were established. The antiviral group exhibited a lower incidence of all-cause hospitalization or mortality (5.93% vs. 9.53%; HR: 0.626; 95% CI: 0.550-0.713) than controls. Additionally, antiviral recipients were associated with a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization (HR: 0.679; 95% CI: 0.594-0.777) and mortality (HR: 0.338; 95% CI: 0.227-0.504). The beneficial effects of antiviral agents were consistent across sex, age, vaccination status, antiviral type, and CKD stage.

CONCLUSION

Oral antiviral agents could be associated with lower rates of all-cause hospitalization or death among non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients with CKD.

Is Metformin Use Associated with a More Favorable COVID-19 Course in People with Diabetes?

Background: Diabetes Mellitus (DM) has been associated with a higher Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) mortality, both in hospitalized patients and in the general population. A possible beneficial effect of metformin on the prognosis of COVID-19 has been reported in some observational studies, whereas other studies disagree. Methods: To investigate the possible effect of metformin on COVID-19 in-hospital mortality, we performed a retrospective study that included all SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with DM who were admitted to two Italian hospitals. In order to adjust for possible confounders accounting for the observed reduction of mortality in metformin users, we adopted the COVID-19 Mortality Risk Score (COVID-19 MRS) as a covariate. Results: Out of the 524 included patients, 33.4% died. A binomial logistic regression showed that metformin use was associated with a significant reduction in case fatality (OR 0.67 [0.45-0.98], p = 0.039), with no significant effect on the need for ventilation (OR 0.75 [0.5-1.11], p = 0.146). After adjusting for COVID-19 MRS, metformin did not retain a significant association with in-hospital mortality [OR 0.795 (0.495-1.277), p = 0.342]. Conclusions: A beneficial effect of metformin on COVID-19 was not proven after adjusting for confounding factors. The use of validated tools to stratify the risk for COVID-19 severe disease and death, such as COVID-19 MRS, may be useful to better explore the potential association of medications and comorbidities with COVID-19 prognosis.

Clinical efficacy of N-acetylcysteine for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

The association between N-acetylcysteine (NAC) and COVID-19 remains undetermined; therefore, this meta-analysis assessed the clinical efficacy of NAC in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.

Methods

This study searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published from their inception to December 17, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the clinical efficacy of NAC for patients with COVID-19 were included.

Results

Five RCTs involving 651 patients were included. There was no significant difference in mortality between the study group receiving NAC and the control group (15.6 % [50/320] vs. 32.3 %, [107/331]; risk ratio [RR]: 0.58; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-1.40). In addition, the two groups did not differ with respect to the incidence of invasive mechanical ventilation (RR: 0.93; 95 % CI: 0.65-1.33), the risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (RR: 0.86; 95 % CI: 0.62-1.21), the length of hospital stay (mean difference [MD]: 0.17 days; 95 % CI: -0.67-1.01), and the length of ICU stay (MD: -0.77 days; 95 % CI: -2.97-1.42).

Conclusions

The administration of NAC did not improve the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19; its routine use is not recommended for patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections.

In vitro antiviral activity of favipiravir and its 6- and 3-O-substituted derivatives against coronavirus: Acetylation leads to improvement of antiviral activity

Favipiravir is currently approved for the treatment of the influenza virus and has shown encouraging results in terms of antiviral capacity in clinical studies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Favipiravir is a prodrug, where its favipiravir-ribofuranosyl-5B-triphosphate metabolite is capable of blocking RNA replication of the virus. However, the antiviral efficiency of favipiravir is limited by two factors: (i) low accumulation in plasma and rapid excretion/elimination post-administration and (ii) low conversion rate into the active metabolite. To tackle these problems, herein, we have designed new favipiravir analogues focusing on the replacement of the fluorine atom at the 6-position by halogen or hydrogen atoms and 3-O-functionalization with labile groups. The first type of functionalization seeks to increase the antiviral activity because of the better ability of the keto-tautomer as a function of the halogen, and it is hypothesized that the keto-tautomer tends to promote the formation of the ribofuranosyl-5B-triphosphate (RTP) metabolite. Meanwhile, the second type of functionalization seeks to promote lipophilicity and increase accumulation in cells. From the in vitro antiviral activity against two coronavirus models (bovine and human 229E), it was identified that the replacement did not improve the antiviral activity against both the models, which seems to be attributable to the low water solubility of these new 6-functionalized analogues. Meanwhile, with 3-O-functionalization, acetylation provided the most active compounds with higher half-maximal inhibitory concentration and selectivity than favipiravir, whereas benzylation/methanosulfonation yielded the least active compounds. In summary, acetylation is found to be a convenient functionalization to enhance the antiviral profile of favipiravir.

Comparison of post-acute sequelae following hospitalization for COVID-19 and influenza

BACKGROUND

Few studies have directly compared the risk and magnitude of post-acute sequelae following COVID-19 and influenza, and most of these studies were conducted before emergence of the Omicron. This study investigated the prevalence of post-COVID conditions and the long-term risk of emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, and deaths in patients with COVID-19 and compared their risk with that of patients with influenza.

METHODS

A retrospective study based on the TriNetX databases, a global health research network. We identified patients with COVID-19 and influenza who required hospitalization between January 1, 2022, and January 1, 2023. We compared the risk of developing any post-COVID conditions between the two groups and also analyzed each post-COVID-19 condition and all-cause ED visits, hospitalizations, and deaths in both populations during the follow-up 90-180 days.

RESULTS

Before matching, 7,187 patients with COVID-19 were older (63.9 ± 16.7 vs. 55.4 ± 21.2) and were predominantly male (54.0% vs. 45.4%), and overweight/obese (16.1% vs. 11.2%) than 11,266 individuals with influenza. After propensity score matching, 6,614 patients were identified in each group, resulting in well-balanced baseline characteristics. During follow-up, the COVID-19 group had a higher incidence of any post-COVID-19 condition when compared with the influenza group (17.9% vs. 13.0%), with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.398 (95% CI, 1.251-1.562). Compared to the influenza group, the COVID-19 group had a significantly higher incidence of abnormal breathing (HR, 1.506; 95% CI, 1.246-1.822), abdominal symptoms (HR, 1.313; HR, 1.034-1.664), fatigue (HR, 1.486; 95% CI, 1.158-1.907), and cognitive symptoms (HR, 1.815; 95% CI, 1.235-2.668). Moreover, the COVID-19 group had a significantly higher risk of the composite outcomes during all-cause ED visits, hospitalizations, and deaths when compared with the influenza group (27.5% vs. 21.7; HR, 1.303; 95% CI, 1.194-1.422).

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that hospitalized COVID-19 patients are at a higher risk of long-term complications when compared with influenza survivors.

Remdesivir-Induced Bradycardia and Mortality in SARS-CoV-2 Infection, Potential Risk Factors Assessment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The efficacy of remdesivir in reducing disease severity among COVID-19-infected patients has been established, but concerns have emerged regarding the potential side effects of bradycardia. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between remdesivir-induced bradycardia and mortality, while also identifying the related risk factors. Materials and methods: The PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Central and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials and prospective or retrospective cohort studies were included (through 14 July 2023). The random-effects model was implemented using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 3.0 to examine the outcomes. Results: A total of 12 prospective or retrospective studies involving 7674 patients were analyzed. The primary outcomes revealed a significant association between remdesivir administration and bradycardia development (Odds ratio = 2.556, 95% CI = 2.049-3.188, p < 0.001). However, no statistically significant increase in the mortality rate was observed among patients with bradycardia during remdesivir treatment (Odds ratio = 0.872, 95% CI = 0.483-1.576, p = 0.651). The secondary outcome demonstrated a significant association between chronic kidney disease (CKD) and remdesivir-induced bradycardia (OR: 1.251, 95% CI: 1.003-1.561, p = 0.047). Moreover, patients with obesity (OR = 1.347, 95% CI = 1.098-1.652, p = 0.004) were more likely to experience remdesivir-induced bradycardia. Conclusions: Although a higher risk of bradycardia occurred during remdesivir treatment, the occurrence of remdesivir-induced bradycardia did not lead to higher mortality. Our study also identified patients with obesity and CKD as high-risk subgroups for experiencing bradycardia during remdesivir treatment.

Precipitating factors of bradycardia after remdesivir administration: ICU admission and cutoff value for declining heart rate

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing concerns about the association between remdesivir and bradycardia in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients receiving remdesivir, information on its clinical course and precipitating factors is limited. Our aim was to investigate possible triggers of bradycardia after remdesivir administration.

METHODS

We retrieved the medical records of hospitalized severe and critical COVID-19 patients who received remdesivir from May 1, 2021 to June 30, 2021. Bradycardia was defined as two episodes of a heart rate (HR) < 60 bpm in 24 h. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted to evaluate the discriminability of heart rate pattern on the occurrence of bradycardia. The precipitating factors of bradycardia were examined by a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Regardless of bradycardia status, the median heart rate dropped during remdesivir treatment (from 85 to 72 bpm, p < 0.001), with the heart rate dropping considerably within the first two days of remdesivir treatment. Among various heart rate descriptors, HR ratiomin (d2-d1) had the best discrimination (AUC = 0.7336), and a reduction in HR ratiomin (d2-d1) by 14.65% was associated with bradycardia. Intensive care unit (ICU) admission was associated with an increased risk of bradycardia (odds ratio: 3.41; 95% CI: 1.12-10.41).

CONCLUSIONS

In severe COVID-19 patients receiving remdesivir, the risks of bradycardia were influenced by a substantial reduction in heart rate during the first two days of remdesivir treatment and ICU admission. These findings suggest that clinical practitioners should intensively monitor heart rates during remdesivir treatment.

Inhaled corticosteroid for patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 has been evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), however, their findings are not consistent.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar were searched to June 10, 2023. Only RCTs that investigated the clinical efficacy and safety of ICS for patients with COVID-19 were included.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs were included. ICS users had significantly higher rate of symptom alleviation at day 14 than the control group (risk ratio [RR], 1.13; 95% CI, 1.04-1.23; I2 = 42%). Additionally, no significant difference between the ICS users and the control group was observed in the composite outcome of urgent care, emergency department (ED) visit or hospitalization (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.08-2.48; I2 = 85%) and hospitalization or death (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.64-1.12; I2 = 0%). Finally, ICS user had a non-significantly lower risk of death at day 28 than the control group (0.63% vs 0.99%; RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.43-1.56; I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Additional ICS use, particularly inhaled budesonide may help symptom relief in patients with COVID-19. However, ICS use did not help reduce the risk of urgent care, ED visit, hospitalization, or death.

Tautomerism and Rotamerism of Favipiravir and Halogenated Analogues in Solution and in the Solid State

Favipiravir is an important selective antiviral against RNA-based viruses, and currently, it is being repurposed as a potential drug for the treatment of COVID-19. This type of chemical system presents different carboxamide-rotameric and hydroxyl-tautomeric states, which could be essential for interpreting its selective antiviral activity. Herein, the tautomeric 3-hydroxypyrazine/3-pyrazinone pair of favipiravir and its 6-substituted analogues, 6-Cl, 6-Br, 6-I, and 6-H, were fully investigated in solution and in the solid state through ultraviolet-visible, 1H nuclear magnetic resonance, infrared spectroscopy, and X-ray diffraction techniques. Also, a study of the gas phase was performed using density functional theory calculations. In general, the keto-enol balance in these 3-hydroxy-2-pyrazinecarboxamides is finely modulated by external and internal electrical variations via changes in solvent polarity or by replacement of substituents at position 6. The enol tautomer was prevalent in an apolar environment, whereas an increase in the level of the keto tautomer was favored by an increase in solvent polarity and, even moreso, with a strong hydrogen-donor solvent. Keto tautomerization was favored either in solution or in the solid state with a decrease in 6-substituent electronegativity as follows: H ≫ I ≈ Br > Cl ≥ F. Specific rotameric states based on carboxamide, "cisoide" and "transoide", were identified for the enol and keto tautomer, respectively; their rotamerism is dependent on the tautomerism and not the aggregation state.

Clinical effectiveness of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19 in patients with cirrhosis

OBJECTIVES

This retrospective cohort study assessed the clinical effectiveness of nirmatrelvirplus ritonavir (NMV-r) in treating COVID-19 in patients with liver cirrhosis(LC).

METHODS

The data of non-hospitalized adult patients with LC who had COVID-19 were selected from the TriNetX platform for the period between 1 March 20201 March 2020, and 31 December 202231 December 2022. Propensity score matching was used to match patients receiving NMV-r (theNMV-r group) with those not receiving NMV-r (the control group). Hazard ratios(HRs) along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the primary outcome - a composite of all-cause hospitalization or mortality during the 30-day follow-up period - were calculated and compared.

RESULTS

Two cohorts of 2,369 patients each with balanced baseline characteristics were identified.During the follow-up period, the NMV-r group had a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization or mortality (HR, 0.642;95% CI, 0.503-0.819) than did the control group.NMV-r was also associated with a reduced risk of individual all-cause hospitalization (HR 0.681, 95% CI 0.530-0.876])and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.270; 95% CI,0.129-0.562). This association was consistently observed in the subgroups of age, sex, vaccination status, and LC severity.

CONCLUSIONS

NMV-r can reduce all-cause hospitalization and mortality among patients with LC who have COVID-19.

Against Authority: The Bioethics of Ivermectin Use for COVID-19 Infection

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought new ethical challenges to both health care professionals and the general public. Among the ethical problems amplified during this period were the making of medical decisions to quickly introduce some drugs into therapeutic practice with unproven or insufficiently proven effects (such as ivermectin), the validity of drug testing, and the allocation of limited resources.

FIELDS OF UNCERTAINTY

The COVID-19 pandemic brought to the attention of the entire scientific world a new problem, which exceeded the guidelines and rules known until then. Out of the desire to quickly solve this medical problem, a series of measures were taken, however not sufficiently validated in scientific terms; the recommendations regarding the use of drugs known for their properties to treat a greater number of conditions, such as ivermectin, was tried.

DATA SOURCES

A narrative review of the specialized literature was carried out using keywords such as COVID-19, ivermectin, ethics, and off-label medication from Scopus and Google Scholar but also of official documents developed at the international level (World Health Organization).

ETHICS AND THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

The off-label use of ivermectin alone or in combination with other medications during COVID pandemic raised problems related to the demonstration of its effectiveness, but also to ethics, starting from the expectations that both the medical staff and the population had of it. Ivermectin therapy was also evaluated by analyzing the behavior of ivermectin based on ethical principles (nonmaleficence, beneficence, and respect for one's autonomy) or on justice. Even in times of pandemic, exceptionalism must not triumph, and finding an effective treatment must be done through studies that respect ethical standard.

CONCLUSIONS

The failures or rather lack of success in decision making during the pandemic showed that alongside scientific knowledge and the development of health policies, it is necessary to constantly evaluate the measures and decisions from an ethical point of view, and the prevention of slippages and abuses is not only necessary but even mandatory.

Clinical efficacy of probiotics in the treatment of patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

This study was conducted to assess the clinical efficacy of probiotics in the treatment of patients with COVID19.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies from their inception to 8 February 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the clinical efficacy of probiotics with usual care or standard care for patients with COVID19 were included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Random-effects model using MantelHaenszel and inverse variance methods were performed to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs with 900 patients were included. The study group receiving probiotics had a non-significantly lower rate of mortality than the control group had, but this difference was not significant (risk ratio [RR], 0.51; 95% CI, 0.22 to 1.16). However, the study group had significantly lower rates of dyspnea (RR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.60), fever (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.85) and headache (RR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.65). Higher complete remission of COVID-19-associated symptoms was observed in the study group than the control group (RR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.40-2.55).

CONCLUSIONS

Although probiotics use did not improve clinical outcomes or reduce inflammatory markers, it may relieve COVID-19-associated symptoms.

Coronavirus disease 2019 rebounds following nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV-r) is an effective anti-SARS-CoV-2 agent and has been recommended in the treatment of nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19. In rare occasions, some patients experience virologic and symptomatic rebound after initial resolution, which we call COVID-19 rebound after NMV-r. Although COVID rebound can also occur after molnupiravir treatment or even no antiviral treatment, we have more serious concern about the rebound after NMV-r, which remains the most effective antiviral. Due to a lack of information about its frequency, mechanism, outcomes, and management, we conducted this review to provide comprehensive and updated information to address these questions. Based on the limited evidence, the incidence of COVID-19 rebound after NMV-r was less than 2%, and most cases developed 5-15 days after initiating NMV-r treatment. Almost all reported cases had mild symptoms, and the clinical condition gradually subsided without additional treatment. Overall, the clinical outcome was favorable, and only a small number of patients required emergency department visits or hospitalization. Regarding virologic rebound, culturable SARS-CoV-2 with possible transmission was observed, so re-isolation may be needed.

Long COVID: An inevitable sequela of SARS-CoV-2 infection

At present, there are more than 560 million confirmed cases of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) worldwide. Although more than 98% of patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can survive acute COVID, a significant portion of survivors can develop residual health problems, which is termed as long COVID. Although severe COVID-19 is generally associated with a high risk of long COVID, patients with asymptomatic or mild disease can also show long COVID. The definition of long COVID is inconsistent and its clinical manifestations are protean. In addition to general symptoms, such as fatigue, long COVID can affect many organ systems, including the respiratory, neurological, psychosocial, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and metabolic systems. Moreover, patients with long COVID may experience exercise intolerance and impaired daily function and quality of life. Long COVID may be caused by SARS-CoV-2 direct injury or its associated immune/inflammatory response. Assessment of patients with long COVID requires comprehensive evaluation, including history taking, physical examination, laboratory tests, radiography, and functional tests. However, there is no known effective treatment for long COVID. Based on the limited evidence, vaccines may help to prevent the development of long COVID. As long COVID is a new clinical entity that is constantly evolving, there are still many unknowns, and further investigation is warranted to enhance our understanding of this disease.

Atypical Mutational Spectrum of SARS-CoV-2 Replicating in the Presence of Ribavirin

We report that ribavirin exerts an inhibitory and mutagenic activity on SARS-CoV-2-infecting Vero cells, with a therapeutic index higher than 10. Deep sequencing analysis of the mutant spectrum of SARS-CoV-2 replicating in the absence or presence of ribavirin indicated an increase in the number of mutations, but not in deletions, and modification of diversity indices, expected from a mutagenic activity. Notably, the major mutation types enhanced by replication in the presence of ribavirin were A→G and U→C transitions, a pattern which is opposite to the dominance of G→A and C→U transitions previously described for most RNA viruses. Implications of the inhibitory activity of ribavirin, and the atypical mutational bias produced on SARS-CoV-2, for the search for synergistic anti-COVID-19 lethal mutagen combinations are discussed.

Oral Janus kinase inhibitors for treating hospitalized patients with COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the clinical efficacy and safety of oral Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant articles written before January 29, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the clinical efficacy and safety of oral JAKis in patients with COVID-19 were included.

RESULTS

In the pooled analysis of the 7 RCTs, the all-cause 28-day mortality rate in the study group receiving JAKis was significantly lower than that in the control group (9.4% [183/1941] vs. 10.9% [184/1687], risk ratio [RR] = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-0.81, I² = 0%). In addition, the risk of 14-day mortality was in the study group was lower than that in the control group (RR = 0.65, 95% CI, 0.46-0.92, I² = 0%). Finally, the study group and the control group exhibited similar risks of any adverse events (RR = 0.96, 95% CI, 0.89-1.04, I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Oral JAKis can significantly reduce the risk of death among patients with COVID-19. In addition, JAKis are tolerable for hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Clinical outcomes, virological efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the clinical outcomes, virological efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant articles written before August 23, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the usefulness and safety of nitazoxanide in patients with COVID-19 were included.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were included. The overall mortality of COVID-19 patients receiving nitazoxanide (study group) was 1.3% (9/670), which was lower than the control group (1.8%, 12/681), but this difference did not reach statistical significance (risk difference [RD], 0.00; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.01; P =0.97). However, nitazoxanide was associated with a higher virological eradication rate than placebo or standard care (RD, 0.09; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.17; P = 0.03). Compared with the placebo or standard care, nitazoxanide were associated with a similar risk of any adverse event (RD, -0.02; 95% CI: -0.07 to 0.03; P = 0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

Although nitazoxanide can help virological eradication and is also tolerable, it does not provide additional clinical benefits. Based on these evidences, the use of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 is not recommended.

Monkeypox: An emerging global threat during the COVID-19 pandemic

The emergence of the monkeypox outbreak in early 2022 has posed a new global health threat. As of July 8, 2022, 9069 laboratory-confirmed cases have been reported, and most of them are from non-endemic countries. The monkeypox virus is an enveloped double-stranded DNA virus, and preliminary genetic data suggest that the 2022 monkeypox virus belongs to the West African clade. In the current outbreak, human-to-human transmission has been the primary transmission mode. Although direct skin-to-skin contact with lesions during sexual activities can spread the virus, it remains unclear whether monkeypox can spread through sexual contact, specifically through contaminated body fluids. The typical presentation of monkeypox includes prodromal symptoms, followed by a rash that usually begins within 1–3 days of symptom onset, and the skin lesions can last for 2–4 weeks and then gradually resolve. However, the monkeypox outbreak in 2022 may exhibit atypical features. A definite diagnosis of monkeypox virus infection requires nucleic acid amplification testing via the polymerase chain reaction method. Supportive care is essential, and antiviral therapy is not considered for all affected patients, but recommended for those at highrisk for severe diseases. The mitigation of monkeypox outbreaks include enhanced case detection, case isolation, contact tracing, and post-exposure vaccination. In conclusion, the current monkeypox outbreak is a new threat during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinicians should be aware of this new situation, which presents a different scenario from those of prior outbreaks. Global health systems should develop effective strategies to mitigate the spread of monkeypox.

The effect of inhaled corticosteroids on the outcomes of patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effect of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) on the clinical outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was not known.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Only phase 2 and 3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from electronic database that investigated ICS in the treatment of COVID-19 patients were included. The outcomes of interest were the resolution of symptoms, risk of hospitalization or urgent medical visit, mortality, and the incidence of adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Five RCTs involving 1243 patients who received ICS and 1526 patients with placebo or usual care were included. The ICS group had a higher rate of symptom resolution than the control group at day 14 (risk ratio [RR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-1.30, p < 0.00001) and day 28 (RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.06-1.18, p < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis showed that only inhaled budesonide, but not ciclesonide, significantly improved symptom resolution at day 14 compared with usual care. Additionally, the ICS group had a significantly lower risk of needing urgent medical care or hospitalization than the control group (RR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.05-0.50; I² = 0, p = 0.002). However, no significant difference in 28-day mortality rate. The incidence of AEs between the ICS and control groups was also similar (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.58-1.88, p = 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, ICS therapy improved symptom resolution, decreased the risk of needing urgent medical care or hospitalization, and did not increase AEs.

Favipiravir-based treatment for outcomes of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigated the clinical efficacy and safety of favipiravir for patients with mild-to-critical COVID-19.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for RCTs published before October 30, 2021. Only RCTs that compared the clinical efficacy and safety of favipiravir -based antiviral regimens (study group) with other alternative treatments or placebos (control group) in patients with COVID-19 were included.

RESULTS

Overall, the clinical improvement rate was significantly higher in the study group than in the control group at the assessment conducted after 14 days (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.12-2.98). The rate of virological eradication was significantly higher in the study group than in the control group at the assessment conducted after 28 days (OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.15-3.78). No significant difference was observed in the rates of invasive mechanical ventilation requirement or ICU admission, mortality, or risk of an adverse event between the study and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Except the clinical improvement rate within 14 days and the virological eradication rate within 28 days, favipiravir-based treatment did not provide significantly additional benefit for patients with COVID-19. Therefore, more evidence is necessary.

Efficacy of melatonin in the treatment of patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

This study investigated the effect of melatonin on clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We searched PubMed, the Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, and Clinicaltrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before September 11, 2021. Only RCTs that compared the clinical efficacy of melatonin with a placebo in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 were included. The primary outcome measure was the clinical recovery rate. We included three RCTs in this meta-analysis. Melatonin 3 mg three times daily was administered in one RCT, and 3 or 6 mg daily before bedtime in the other two trials. Treatment duration was 14 days in two RCTs and 7 days in one trial. The clinical recovery rates were 94.2% (81/86) and 82.4% (70/85) in the melatonin and control groups, respectively. Overall, patients receiving melatonin had a higher clinical recovery rate than did the controls (odds ratio [OR]: 3.67; 95% CI: 1.21-11.12; I²  = 0%, p = 0.02). The risk of intensive care unit admission was numerically lower in the melatonin group than in the control group (8.3% [6/72] vs. 17.6% [12/68], OR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.16-1.25; I²  = 0%, p = 0.13), and the risk of mortality was numerically lower in the melatonin group than in the control group (1.4% [1/72] vs. 4.4% [3/68], OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.03-3.18; I²  = 0%, p = 0.33). In conclusion, melatonin may help improve the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19.

Effectiveness of Favipiravir on Nonsevere, Early-Stage COVID-19 in Japan: A Large Observational Study Using the COVID-19 Registry Japan

Introduction

Several randomized controlled trials have compared the effectiveness of favipiravir with that of placebo. However, evidence regarding its effect on nonsevere, early-stage coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains insufficient.

Methods

We used the COVID-19 Registry Japan, a nationwide registry of inpatients with COVID-19, for evaluating the effectiveness of favipiravir on patients with nonsevere, early-stage COVID-19. Eligible patients, who did not need supplementary oxygen therapy at admission, were classified according to two regimens (starting favipiravir therapy within 4 days from admission vs. no favipiravir during hospitalization) and were then compared using a three-step method (cloning, censoring, and weighting). The primary outcome was supplementary oxygen requirement during hospitalization, and the secondary outcomes were the need for invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (IMV/ECMO) and overall mortality at 30 days.

Results

A total of 7654 cases were analyzed. The “start favipiravir” regimen did not show substantial differences in the primary outcome [hazard ratio 0.825, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.657–1.04, p = 0.098] and both of the secondary outcomes [need for IMV/ECMO and overall 30-day mortality, hazard ratio 1.02 (95% CI 0.649–1.60) and 0.869 (95% CI 0.519–1.46), p = 0.929 and 0.594, respectively].

Conclusions

In this large cohort from a COVID-19 registry, favipiravir was not associated with a positive effect on the clinical outcome on patients with nonsevere, early-stage COVID-19, suggesting that it is not an essential drug for COVID-19 treatment.

Changing Epidemiology of Respiratory Tract Infection during COVID-19 Pandemic

The outbreak of COVID-19 has significantly changed the epidemiology of respiratory tract infection in several ways. The implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) including universal masking, hand hygiene, and social distancing not only resulted in a decline in reported SARS-CoV-2 cases but also contributed to the decline in the non-COVID-19 respiratory tract infection-related hospital utilization. Moreover, it also led to the decreased incidence of previous commonly encountered respiratory pathogens, such as influenza and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Although antimicrobial agents are essential for treating patients with COVID-19 co-infection, the prescribing of antibiotics was significantly higher than the estimated prevalence of bacterial co-infection, which indicated the overuse of antibiotics or unnecessary antibiotic use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, inappropriate antimicrobial exposure may drive the selection of drug-resistant microorganisms, and the disruption of infection control in COVID-19 setting measures may result in the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). In conclusion, NPIs could be effective in preventing respiratory tract infection and changing the microbiologic distribution of respiratory pathogens; however, we should continue with epidemiological surveillance to establish updated information, antimicrobial stewardship programs for appropriate use of antibiotic, and infection control prevention interventions to prevent the spread of MDROs during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The effect of sofosbuvir-based treatment on the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the efficacy of sofosbuvir-based antiviral treatment against COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 15 August 2021. Studies comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir-based antiviral regimens (study group) with other antivirals or standard of care (control group) in patients with COVID-19 were included. Overall, 687 patients with COVID-19 were included, of which 377 patients received sofosbuvir-based treatment. Mortality was lower in the study group than in the control group [odds ratio (OR) = 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30–0.79; I² = 0%]. The overall clinical recovery rate was higher in the study group than in the control group (OR = 1.82, 95% CI 1.20–2.76; I² = 28%). The study group presented a lower requirement for mechanical ventilation (OR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.13–0.89; I² = 0%) and intensive care unit admission (OR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.25–0.70; I² = 0%) than the control group. Furthermore, the study group exhibited a shorter hospital length of stay [mean deviation (MD), –1.49, 95% CI –2.62 to –0.37; I² = 56%] and recovery time (MD, –1.34, 95% CI –2.29 to –0.38; I² = 46%) than the control group. Sofosbuvir-based treatment may help reduce mortality in patients with COVID-19 and improve associated clinical outcomes. Furthermore, sofosbuvir-based treatment was as safe as the comparator in patients with COVID-19. However, further large-scale studies are warranted to validate these findings.

Efficacy of antiviral therapies for COVID-19: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to pose a significant threat to public health worldwide. The purpose of this study was to review current evidence obtained from randomized clinical trials on the efficacy of antivirals for COVID-19 treatment.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed to identify randomized controlled trials published up to September 4, 2021 that examined the efficacy of antivirals for COVID-19 treatment. Studies that were not randomized controlled trials or that did not include treatment of COVID-19 with approved antivirals were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) method. Due to study heterogeneity, inferential statistics were not performed and data were expressed as descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Of the 2,284 articles retrieved, 31 (12,440 patients) articles were included. Overall, antivirals were more effective when administered early in the disease course. No antiviral treatment demonstrated efficacy at reducing COVID-19 mortality. Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir results suggested clinical improvement, although statistical power was low. Remdesivir exhibited efficacy in reducing time to recovery, but results were inconsistent across trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Although select antivirals have exhibited efficacy to improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients, none demonstrated efficacy in reducing mortality. Larger RCTs are needed to conclusively establish efficacy.

COVID-19 immunopathology with emphasis on Th17 response and cell-based immunomodulation therapy: Potential targets and challenges

The role of the immune system against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unknown in many aspects, and the protective or pathologic mechanisms of the immune response are poorly understood. Pro-inflammatory cytokine release and a consequent cytokine storm can lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and result in multi-organ failure. There are many T cell subsets during anti-viral immunity. The Th17-associated response, as a pro-inflammatory pathway, and its consequent outcomes in many autoimmune disorders play a fundamental role in progression of systemic hyper-inflammation during COVID-19. Therapeutic strategies based on immunomodulation therapy could be helpful for targeting hyper-inflammatory immune responses in COVID-19, especially Th17-related inflammation and hyper-cytokinemia. Cell-based immunotherapeutic approaches including mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), tolerogenic dendritic cells (tolDCs) and regulatory T cells (Tregs) seem to be promising strategies as orchestrators of the immune response against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this review, we highlight Th17-related immunopathology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and discuss cell-based immunomodulatory strategies and their mechanisms for regulation of the hyper-inflammation during COVID-19.

Clinical efficacy and safety of interferon-β-containing regimens in the treatment of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials(RCTs) was to investigate the efficacy of interferon (IFN)-β-containing regimens in treating patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 17 July 2021. RCTs comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of IFN-β-containing regimens (study group) to other antiviral treatment options or placebo (control group) in treating patients with COVID-19 were included.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs were included. No significant difference in the 28-day all-cause mortality rate was observed between the study and control groups (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.44-1.24; I² = 51%). The study groups had a lower rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions than the control groups (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.36-0.95; I² = 0%). Furthermore, INF-β was not associated with an increased risk of any adverse event (AE) or serious AE when compared with the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

IFN-β does not appear to provide an increased survival benefit in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 but may help reduce the risk of ICU admission. Moreover, IFN-β is a safe agent for use in the treatment of COVID-19.

Scalable synthesis of favipiravir via conventional and continuous flow chemistry

Decagram scale synthesis of favipiravir was performed in 9 steps using diethyl malonate as cheap starting material. Hydrogenation and bromination steps were achieved by employing a continuous flow reactor. The synthetic process provided a total of 16% yield and it is suitable for larger-scale synthesis and production.

Decagram scale synthesis of favipiravir was performed in 9 steps using diethyl malonate as cheap starting material.